Gay Rights Watch

ASHLAND — Fliers urging violence against homosexuals — including murder — have sparked a campuswide safety alert and a police investigation into a possible hate crime at Southern Oregon University.

Several versions of increasingly threatening fliers have been found during the past two weeks attached to doors and tucked into mailboxes on the Ashland campus, said Eric Rodriguez, SOU interim security director.

"They weren’t that violent at first and they got more and more so," said Rodriguez.

Fliers were found just before this week’s student government elections and mentioned a candidate, according to an e- mail forwarded from Danielle Mancuso, interim coordinator of SOU’s Queer Resource Center.

"The Bible says that homosexual offenders should be put to death!" read one flier.

"Dykes and fags have no soul, so when you kill them you haven’t really committed a crime," read another.

Local gay-rights advocates held a campus protest Thursday and others plan a vigil and rally at 8 tonight on Ashland’s Plaza.

"These are the first steps before serious crimes happen and we all know that," said Jeffrey Foust, Southern Oregon organizer for Basic Rights Oregon.

Creators and distributors of the fliers could face charges of harassment and intimidation, which include crimes of bias based on sexual orientation and other factors, Rodriguez said. Ashland police have launched an investigation, he said.

SOU officials and police are taking the threats of harm seriously, he said.

"That kind of ratchets up this thing when you’re advocating violence against a person or a group of people," Rodriguez said. "That’s when it goes beyond the free speech issue."

In a campus safety alert issued Monday, officials urged students to stick together at night, to call for campus escorts, to close dorm room doors and to report any suspicious incidents.

Several students have indicated that the fliers made them uneasy, even scared, Rodriguez said.

The fliers apparently were distributed in connection with the SOU student election in which new president Kurt Manseau and executive vice president Alicia-Lynne Ryland-Nation ran unopposed.

This is the second time in a month that questions of intimidation based on sexual orientation have been raised at SOU. A 19-year-old male student said he was verbally harassed and spat upon by a group of men who perceived he was gay.

Mancuso said she believed there was a connection between that incident and the fliers.

"These kinds of things spawn more people who feel that same way," she said.

SOU President Elisabeth Zinser sent a campuswide letter condemning the incident and vowing to reiterate the campus culture of tolerance. Zinser and other SOU officials will hold a press conference about the issue at 11 a.m. today.

The 5,000-student campus is in the center of Ashland, which long has been regarded as a place that welcomes homosexuals.

Rodriguez said he was surprised by the fliers, but not naive about the possibility of threats and violence.

"I don’t think we’re immune to the ills of the rest of the world," he said. "We’re not taking anything for granted because of our reputation for tolerance. We know bad things can happen anywhere and we’re trying to make sure they don’t happen here."

By JONEL ALECCIA
Mail Tribune

Then and now. How quickly things change. What do you think Oregon? Who do you believe? When Oregon's 'Defense of Marriage Coalition' and the 'Oregon Family Council' were seeking a Yes vote from Oregon Voters on Measure 36, the DOMC was clear that the vote was not about civil unions, and even suggested it would be open to civil union legislation to provide same-sex couples with the benefits of marriage. The proof is all here.This is what they said then:

“Same-sex couples should seek marriage-like rights through another avenue, such as civil unions.”
- Tim Nashif, Oregon Family Council Director and an organizer of the Measure 36 campaign Bend Bulletin 8/20/2004

[Now Tim Nashif and his organization are now fighting very hard against civil unions - what's the story?]

"If same-sex couples need legal protection, they should consult their legislative representatives. If they need legislation to do that, no one is going to stand in their way.” -Defense of Marriage Coalition Executive Director Mike White, Lincoln City News Guard 11/10/2004

[That is exactly what we are trying to do via the legislature with SB1000. So why are they "standing in our way"?]

“Gay and lesbian couples are free to pursue marriage-like rights via a different avenue, such as civil unions that have been approved in Vermont.”
- Defense of Marriage Coalition Spokesperson Georgene Rice, Deschutes County Bulletin 9/30/2004

[Again, that is exactly what we are trying to do via the legislature with SB1000. Why did they lie to the Oregonians?]

“The notion that civil unions by definition would be unequal is without merit because civil unions become what you make them.”
- Defense of Marriage Coalition Spokesperson Georgene Rice, Oregon Public Broadcasting 10/2004

“The coalition set out to defend marriage, and now we have an amendment that does that.”
- Tim Nashif, Oregon Family Council Director and an organizer of the Measure 36 campaign AP 11/22/2004

“Oregon’s measure was written specifically not to address civil unions.”
- Tim Nashif, Oregon Family Council Director and an organizer of the Measure 36 campaign Bend Bulletin. 11/6/2004

But, now that measure 36 has passed, the same groups are saying something very different. These people are FULL of lies and deceit. This is what they are saying now:

"We would be against any measure that takes all the benefits of marriage and then calls it something else. We don't think Oregonians had that in mind when they passed Measure 36." - Tim Nashif, Oregon Family Council Director and an organizer of the Measure 36 campaign Bend Bulletin 4/15 2005

"This is gay marriage in disguise. Kulongoski and his fellow Democrats trying to force their radical agenda on Oregonians."
- Representative Jeff Kropf Register Guard 4/14/2005

“SB 1000 takes everything that marriage is and calls it civil unions."
- Tim Nashif, Oregon Family Council Director and an organizer of the Measure 36 campaign The Statesman Journal 4/17/2005

"The provisions of SB 1000 are a direct affront to the vote of the people on Measure 36.”
- Rep. Dennis Richardson The Statesman Journal 4/17/2005

“First, marriage was never intended as a means to access rights. I believe that degrades the institution. The rights and benefits associated with marriage are a byproduct, designed to recognize and encourage the contribution and strength traditional families make to society.”
- Tim Nashif, Oregon Family Council Director and an organizer of the Measure 36 campaign Oregonian 4/17/2005

“If civil union status is granted, there will be no turning back. The liberals and homosexual-lesbian coalition will have won and the people’s vote in favor of traditional marriage will have been effectively nullified.”
- Representative Dennis Richardson In an e-mail to other House Republicans

“Please understand there is no greater threat to marriage right now than civil unions.”
- Oregon Family Council Communications Director Nick Graham In a letter to supporters 4/26/05

Am I the only one who sees the contradictory statements here? Oregon voters were misled during the Measure 36 campaign... and these right wing fucks who proclaim to be "oh so holy" are nothing but liars. So that's that - facts are facts. Do Oregonians truly believe these people?

The DOMC has hired a lobbyist in Salem to fight SB 1000 - the bill that would grant civil unions to same-sex couples. It would also bring a statewide ban on discrimination in the workplace (meaning that you cannot be fired simply for being gay - no different than if you were black for example), Oregonians can be denied service in a bank or restaurant because they're gay, rejected for housing because they're gay and turned down for a job interview -- or even fired -- because they're gay. Is this fair? NO. I don't care how conservative you are - this is NOT right, but it IS real.

Think about this people. Go back and read these disgusting quotes from above. Senate Bill 1073 needs to be passed. Call your Senator today and demand that they support the bill. To find out the contact information for your senators click here.

Legislation to allow same-sex marriage in California will go to a full vote in the Assembly next week.

The measure was approved Wednesday night by the Appropriations Committee, the final step in getting to the floor for a vote. The legislation was one of a handful of bills earmarked for the lower house. The committee shelved 506 other bills.

"We have very high hopes it will prevail," Equality California spokesperson Eddie Gutierrez told 365Gay.com.

"But as every piece of LGBT civil rights legislation that reached this stage of the process -- from hate crimes to domestic partnerships - the vote will come down to the wire."

The legislation is called the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, and was authored by openly gay Assemblymember Mark Leno ( D-San Francisco).

The bill would require local clerks to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples but allow people opposed to gay marriage to refuse to conduct weddings.

A similar bill last year was pulled by Leno when it became obvious there were not enough votes to pass it. This time though, the measure has the support of Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and other key Democrats. Last month the California Democratic Party passed a resolution supporting same-sex marriage.

Opponents of gay marriage are vowing a fight and have called on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to come out publicly against the legislation.

So far Schwarzenegger has sent mixed messages about whether he would sign the legislation if it were passed.

In a January meeting with the editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle Schwarzenegger suggested that this may not be the best time to push gay marriage, saying that a legislative push to fully recognize marriage rights for gays might backfire.

"Eventually in a few years from now, you can readdress it again and see what the people of California think,'' he told the paper. "You cannot force-feed those kind of things.''

Last year in a Tonight Show appearance Schwarzenegger said gay marriage would be "fine with me" if it were enshrined in state law or ruled legal by the courts.

The issue of same-sex marriage also is slowly heading toward the California Supreme Court. Last month a San San Francisco judge ruled that state laws preventing gay marriage are illegal.

Meanwhile, a a conservative group called the "Voters' Right to Protect Marriage Initiative" has begun collecting signatures to have a proposed amendment to the California Constitution banning same-sex marriage placed on the 2006 ballot. If approved by voters it would not only bar gays and lesbians from marrying but also void the state's landmark domestic partner law.

Wednesday, LGBT groups and their supporters announced a broad coalition to combat any attempt to amend the Constitution.

Source: 356gay.com

For some reason this made me laugh. Was it the title? Probably.

Portland has always gone after the seasoned traveler. The city's natural beauty draws big money from empty nesters, retired people and cultural tourists. The Portland Oregon Visitors Association also wants to tout the city as a destination for gay and lesbian visitors.

With an updated travel brochure due out this summer, the visitors association plans to highlight the city's new gay friendly clubs and culture -- along with the beautiful scenery, vibrant culinary scene and tax-free shopping.

It couldn't come at a better time. Last year, Multnomah County put itself on the map as a gay-friendly area when it issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

"Nationally, that opened peoples' eyes to who Portland is," says David Paisley of Community Marketing Inc., a San Francisco research firm. "Until that time, gay and lesbians outside of the Pacific Northwest didn't really know Portland."

Gay and lesbian travelers tend to mirror the cultural traveler: They spend more money on travel, take many longer trips, stay in hotels and spend more money shopping and on cultural activities than typical tourists. The travel industry can't ignore that group, which spends $54 million a year on travel just in the United States.

"That's 10 percent of the travel market," says Barbara Steinfield, director of tourism development for the visitors association. To capture some of that money, Portland must compete with well-known gay-friendly cities such as San Francisco and Philadelphia. In the past two years, the visitors association spent about $24,000 on advertising and trade shows to do just that. It was, for example, one of 90 cities with a booth at the Gay and Lesbian World Travel Expo in Seattle in March.

The updated brochure -- first created two years ago -- will help.

But it's already outdated, says Debbie Caselton of the Portland Area Business Association, the city's gay and lesbian chamber of commerce. "Now, there are many more choices for night clubs and for gay-owned restaurants," she says.

Last year, the visitors association joined with Seattle and Vancouver, B.C., to create the Pacific Northwest Vacation Planner, marketed to gay and lesbian tourists. The publication included two local hotels -- the Hotel Vintage Plaza and Fifth Avenue Suites. Although Seattle listed several hotels, Paisley says, Portland continues to make strides.

"Nationally, the Pacific Northwest is ahead of the curve," says Paisley, who spoke earlier this month at a seminar to study the value of marketing to the gay and lesbian community. "There's still plenty of room to grow."

Story By Lori Mendoza

Gay groups and their supporters announced a massive battle plan on Wednesday to combat a proposed amendment to the California Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

At simultaneous press conferences in cities across California, representatives of more than 200 groups announced the formation of a coalition to oppose the amendment.

The coalition, which calls itself "Equality for All", will soon begin fundraising and organizing, its leaders announced.

A group called the "Voters' Right to Protect Marriage Initiative" has begun collecting signatures to have the proposed amendment (AB 19) placed on the 2006 ballot. If approved by voters it would not only bar gays and lesbians from marrying but also void the state's landmark domestic partner law.

“The sponsors of this initiative are ‘hate groups’ who have decided that they are not going to let lesbian and gay people be fully accepted and fully a part of our society,” pastor Cecil Williams of Glide Memorial Church told a rally in San Francisco Wednesday.

“We are not going to take this sitting down. This type of initiative and this type of discrimination should not exist in the 21st century.”

Victor Hwang of the Asian Pacific Islander Legal Outreach said the Asian American community knows a lot about discrimination.

"In the past, state and federal laws have barred Asian American women from entering this country, have prohibited marriages between whites and ‘negroes, mulattoes, or Mongolians,’ and have directed that any U.S. citizen marrying an Asian would be stripped of their citizenship

“If passed, this initiative would make California the most backwards state in our nation and turn back our clocks more than a hundred years," said Hwang.

The "Voters' Right to Protect Marriage Initiative" was filed with the state Attorney General's Office last week by the California Campaign for Children and Families, a group that has been involved in legal battles against same-sex marriage in the state.

Randy Thomasson the group's leader said that the CCCF decided to begin the initiative after state Assembly and Senate committees this month rejected a constitutional amendment.

Meanwhile, a bill that would allow same-sex marriage is moving forward. The Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act passed a key committee late last month. The legislation, sponsored by openly gay Assemblyman Mark Leno ( D-San Francisco) would allow gays to marry but also allow churches opposed to same-sex unions to refuse to perform the marriages.

It has the support of Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and other key Democrats. Earlier this month the California Democratic Party passed a resolution supporting same-sex marriage.

Source: 365gay.com

I came across a post from the Benton County Republicans today. It's amazing how the Oregon GOP is basically run by the Oregon Family Council - as well as the so called "Defense of Marriage Coalition". They are the same group - just different names.

This is what they said:

Recently supporters of SB 1000 have been very vocal in contending that Oregon Family Council and Defense of Marriage Coalition’s opposition to SB 1000 contradicts their position on civil union legislation during last year's measure 36 campaign.

For the last 25 years, Oregon Family Council has always contested same-sex domestic partner relationships and continues to do so with its opposition to SB 1000.

However, during the M36 campaign DOMC did not take a position on the issue. This was purposeful because the M36 debate related to marriage not civil unions. Also any discussion related to civil unions” would have been speculative because until SB 1000, “civil union” legislation did not exist in Oregon.

OK - So here is the proof they do in fact contradict their own position time after time. Read the following quotes from these same groups - said during the Measure 36 campaign.

“Same-sex couples should seek marriage-like rights through another avenue, such as civil unions.
Tim Nashif, Oregon Family Council Director, and organizer of the Measure 36 campaign, Bend Bulletin 8/20/2004

“If same-sex couples need legal protection, they should consult their legislative representatives. If they need legislation to do that, no one is going to stand in their way.
Defense of Marriage Coalition, Executive Director, Mike White, Lincoln City News Guard 11/10/2004

The Coalition'’s amendment did not preclude the state of Oregon from creating civil unions, so that same-sex couples could have the same rights as married heterosexual couples.
Defense of Marriage Coalition Spokesperson, Georgene Rice, The Dalles Chronicle 9/30/2004

I'm sorry - did I miss something? I could list about 6 pages of the Oregon Family Council and The Defense of Marriage Coalition's back and forth rhetoric - but truthfully isn't that enough? So my question is how the hell can they so blatantly lie to the public? Do people not see this?

Wake up Oregon! Reciprocal Benefits: NOT a Reasonable Alternative to SB 1000

So I called my senator this afternoon to urge him to support SB 1000 as one bill - not two. I spoke with his staffer for quite a while about the calls they were getting regarding Senate Bill 1000. She said that they have been getting some very nasty phone calls from the opposition. She also informed me that they had been getting a ton of phone calls from those same people. Now, that is expected - the 'Oregon Family Council' has their propoganda machine together and can organize their base and get them involved like no other. They use whatever it takes - most of the time they use flat out lies. Well, not most - all.

I urge you to take the 30-seconds to call your state senator. It is so easy to do and this site will even tell you who your senator is and give you their phone number. Click here to go there now.

Why would it not surprise me if we started to see this in to the U.S.?

Despite international condemnation Saudi Arabia continues mass arrests of men suspected of being gay. On the weekend Saudi heavily armed security forces burst into a building in Riyadh and arrested 92 men.

Al-Wifaq news, which has close links to the Saudi Arabian Interior Ministry, quotes officials as calling the venue a "deviants' party" - a term frequently used in describing gays.

Homosexuality is illegal in the Saudi kingdom and punishable by by flogging, lengthy prison terms or death under Sharia Islamic law.

Al-Wifaq reports that some of the men were foreign nationals - from Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Syria and Lebanon.

In March month, 110 men were arrested at what was described as a "gay wedding" in the city of Jeddah.

About eighty men were later released. The remaining men were sentenced to prison and floggings.

Four of the men (two Saudi Arabians, a Jordanian and a Yemeni) were sentenced by a court in Jeddah to 2,000 lashes and two years' imprisonment, and 31 others to 200 lashes and six months to one year in prison.

The sentences prompted an appeal to the government by Amnesty International. There has been no response from the government.

A day prior to the March arrests, a gay couple was beheaded in a public execution in the northern town of Arar, near the Iraq border.